Re: [HACKERS] Newest Patch...try this one... - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Newest Patch...try this one...
Date
Msg-id 199803230101.KAA12574@srapc451.sra.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Newest Patch...try this one...  (t-ishii@sra.co.jp (Tatsuo Ishii))
Responses Re: Final Patch?
Re: [HACKERS] Newest Patch...try this one...
List pgsql-hackers
>I just put the final patch in place (unannounced) for anyone to try out...
>
>ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/postgresql-6.3-6.3.1.gz
>
>Unless there are any outstandign problems with either that patch or the
>full distribution, I will put out an announcement of those two Monday
>morning...

It seems still the problem below exists in postgresql-6.3-6.3.1.gz.
(I haven't checked postgresql-6.3.1.tar.gz yet)

>>> o an unnecceary patch (I guess) for
>>>   backend/optimizer/geqo/geqo_paths.c included. This cause some
>>>   compile errors.
>>
>>        This patch represents what has changed between the tar file that
>>is v6.3 and the source tree that is current...if there is an unnecessary
>>patch, then it should most likely be removed from current tree altogether,
>>no?
>
>I don't know why this happens, but...
>
>It seems that the patch is trying to create a new file of geqo_path.c
>which is identical to existing geqo_path.c in the 6.3 tar file.
>As a result, dupliation of it is performed by the patch.
>To confirm above, take a look at the RCS id of geqo_path.c
>in the tar file and the patch.
>You will find they are same (1.8 created on 1998/2/26).

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephane Lajeunesse
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: expr ? trueval : falseval
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: expr ? trueval : falseval